Qualcomm Adreno 690 vs Radeon Pro 555X

Place in the ranking	505	806
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Power efficiency	7.74	26.88
Architecture	GCN 4.0 (2016−2020)	no data
GPU code name	Polaris 21	no data
Market segment	Mobile workstation	Laptop
Release date	16 July 2018 (6 years ago)	6 December 2018 (6 years ago)

Detailed specifications

General parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores	768	no data
Core clock speed	907 MHz	no data
Number of transistors	3,000 million	no data
Manufacturing process technology	14 nm	5 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	75 Watt	7 Watt
Texture fill rate	43.54	no data
Floating-point processing power	1.393 TFLOPS	no data
ROPs	16	no data
TMUs	48	no data

Form factor & compatibility

Information on compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For desktop graphics cards it's interface and bus (motherboard compatibility), additional power connectors (power supply compatibility).

Laptop size	large	no data
Interface	PCIe 3.0 x8	no data
Supplementary power connectors	None	no data

VRAM capacity and type

Parameters of VRAM installed: its type, size, bus, clock and resulting bandwidth. Integrated GPUs have no dedicated video RAM and use a shared part of system RAM.

Memory type	GDDR5	no data
Maximum RAM amount	4 GB	no data
Memory bus width	128 Bit	no data
Memory clock speed	1275 MHz	no data
Memory bandwidth	81.6 GB/s	no data
Shared memory	-	+

Connectivity and outputs

Types and number of video connectors present on the reviewed GPUs. As a rule, data in this section is precise only for desktop reference ones (so-called Founders Edition for NVIDIA chips). OEM manufacturers may change the number and type of output ports, while for notebook cards availability of certain video outputs ports depends on the laptop model rather than on the card itself.

Display Connectors

No outputs

no data

Supported technologies

Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.

FreeSync

API compatibility

List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.

DirectX	12 (12_0)	12
Shader Model	6.4	no data
OpenGL	4.6	no data
OpenCL	2.0	no data
Vulkan	1.2.131	-

Synthetic benchmark performance

Non-gaming benchmark results comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.

Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark score. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.

Pro 555X 8.42
+208%

Qualcomm Adreno 690 2.73

Passmark

This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark. It gives the graphics card a thorough evaluation under various types of load, providing four separate benchmarks for Direct3D versions 9, 10, 11 and 12 (the last being done in 4K resolution if possible), and few more tests engaging DirectCompute capabilities.

Pro 555X 3235
+208%

Qualcomm Adreno 690 1049

Gaming performance

Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.

Average FPS across all PC games

Here are the average frames per second in a large set of popular games across different resolutions:

Full HD

70−75
+204%

−204%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2	14−16 +87.5%	8−9 −87.5%
Cyberpunk 2077	16−18 +143%	7−8 −143%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5	27−30 +286%	7−8 −286%
Counter-Strike 2	14−16 +87.5%	8−9 −87.5%
Cyberpunk 2077	16−18 +143%	7−8 −143%
Forza Horizon 4	30−35 +162%	12−14 −162%
Forza Horizon 5	20−22 +900%	2−3 −900%
Metro Exodus	21−24 +360%	5−6 −360%
Red Dead Redemption 2	21−24 +130%	10−11 −130%
Valorant	30−35 +1450%	2−3 −1450%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5	27−30 +286%	7−8 −286%
Counter-Strike 2	14−16 +87.5%	8−9 −87.5%
Cyberpunk 2077	16−18 +143%	7−8 −143%
Dota 2	30−33 +114%	14 −114%
Far Cry 5	35−40 +125%	16 −125%
Fortnite	50−55 +233%	14−16 −233%
Forza Horizon 4	30−35 +162%	12−14 −162%
Forza Horizon 5	20−22 +900%	2−3 −900%
Grand Theft Auto V	30−33 +329%	7−8 −329%
Metro Exodus	21−24 +360%	5−6 −360%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	65−70 +168%	24−27 −168%
Red Dead Redemption 2	21−24 +130%	10−11 −130%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	24−27 +160%	10−11 −160%
Valorant	30−35 +1450%	2−3 −1450%
World of Tanks	120−130 +157%	45−50 −157%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	27−30 +286%	7−8 −286%
Counter-Strike 2	14−16 +87.5%	8−9 −87.5%
Cyberpunk 2077	16−18 +143%	7−8 −143%
Dota 2	30−33 −16.7%	35 +16.7%
Far Cry 5	35−40 +125%	16−18 −125%
Forza Horizon 4	30−35 +162%	12−14 −162%
Forza Horizon 5	20−22 +900%	2−3 −900%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	65−70 +168%	24−27 −168%
Valorant	30−35 +1450%	2−3 −1450%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2	10−11 +900%	1−2 −900%
Grand Theft Auto V	10−12 +1000%	1−2 −1000%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	40−45 +121%	18−20 −121%
Red Dead Redemption 2	7−8 +250%	2−3 −250%
World of Tanks	60−65 +239%	18−20 −239%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	16−18 +700%	2−3 −700%
Counter-Strike 2	30−35 +0%	30−35 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	7−8 +75%	4−5 −75%
Far Cry 5	18−20 +157%	7−8 −157%
Forza Horizon 4	18−20 +1700%	1−2 −1700%
Forza Horizon 5	12−14 +300%	3−4 −300%
Metro Exodus	14−16 +250%	4−5 −250%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	10−12 +83.3%	6−7 −83.3%
Valorant	21−24 +133%	9−10 −133%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2	2−3	0−1
Dota 2	18−20 +18.8%	16−18 −18.8%
Grand Theft Auto V	18−20 +26.7%	14−16 −26.7%
Metro Exodus	4−5 +300%	1−2 −300%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	24−27 +200%	8−9 −200%
Red Dead Redemption 2	5−6 +400%	1−2 −400%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	18−20 +26.7%	14−16 −26.7%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	7−8 +250%	2−3 −250%
Counter-Strike 2	2−3	0−1
Cyberpunk 2077	3−4 +50%	2−3 −50%
Dota 2	18−20 +18.8%	16−18 −18.8%
Far Cry 5	10−11 +400%	2−3 −400%
Fortnite	8−9 +700%	1−2 −700%
Forza Horizon 4	10−11	0−1
Forza Horizon 5	6−7 +500%	1−2 −500%
Valorant	8−9 +167%	3−4 −167%

This is how Pro 555X and Qualcomm Adreno 690 compete in popular games:

Pro 555X is 204% faster in 1080p

Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:

in Forza Horizon 4, with 1440p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the Pro 555X is 1700% faster.
in Dota 2, with 1080p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the Qualcomm Adreno 690 is 17% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

Pro 555X is ahead in 57 tests (97%)
Qualcomm Adreno 690 is ahead in 1 test (2%)
there's a draw in 1 test (2%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	8.42	2.73
Recency	16 July 2018	6 December 2018
Chip lithography	14 nm	5 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	75 Watt	7 Watt

Pro 555X has a 208.4% higher aggregate performance score.

Qualcomm Adreno 690, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 4 months, a 180% more advanced lithography process, and 971.4% lower power consumption.

The Radeon Pro 555X is our recommended choice as it beats the Qualcomm Adreno 690 in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon Pro 555X is a mobile workstation card while Qualcomm Adreno 690 is a mobile workstation one.

Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.